I think it'd be a good idea to have an App store for the mac, a centralized place to get free and non-free apps for the mac over the web, if Apple could somehow set that up that would be nice. That and brushing up the interface are all I would want for new features, other than that getting down and scrubbing up that code sounds good to me!

Quote:

Originally Posted by addabox

Being an Apple basher means you never, ever have to acknowledge success.

"Rather than focusing primarily on new features, Snow Leopard will enhance the performance of OS X, set a new standard for quality and lay the foundation for future OS X innovation."

"Rather than...primarily", key words here.

Snow Leopard is sort of analogous to a rebuilding year for a football team. You focus on the fundamentals, the footwork, the speed, etc. For Snow Leopard this could be as much as firing the trustee, but aging, PowerPC but it's really about making sure that when Lion comes out (next season) OS X is one finely tuned, well oiled machine ready to deliver.

This is how every release has been. One release gives us cool stuff, the next makes it what we always wanted, but we never knew we wanted it until we had the "Ehn, this sucks, I want more" version.

Finally, Apple never talks about their upcoming stuff. What we have today is the only thing we'll have to work with until we start seeing developer seeds come March maybe. Unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't over promise and under deliver, Apple promises little and delivers much.

The real question is this: is QuickTime X a total rewrite or still building on the ancient QuickTime foundation? If it's the latter, I'm totally disappointed. We don't just need new codecs...we need new plumbing.

Completely agree. I am a developer and I work with both Microsoft's technologies and QuickTime.

Comparing to Microsoft's DirectShow, QT is badly architected. It is extremely difficult to add new formats and codecs. Meanwhile, adding a new format in DS is easy. Just look at all the open source DirectShow components for all the weird formats.

Am I really that old? Or are the kids today totally devoid of any technical understanding of operating system technology?

1. No PPC support is at best an extrapolation from conspiracy minded bloggers and their sources. The press release has no indication of dropping PPC support whatsoever. Hell, it doesn't even mention Intel other the SquirrelFish footnote. It won't be a surprise (since there could be good marketing reasons to do so), but I don't see it in this PR.

2. Are some of you guys insane, part 1? Making the operating system massively multi-core capable is a massive undertaking. Making the whole OS entirely threadsafe and re-architected for massive SMP to take advantage of all of the cores is essentially rewriting the operating system. And they better start doing it with Nehalem knocking on the door. By this time next year, Apple could be shipping a MacBook Pro (that's a laptop) consisting of 1 CPU with 4 cores and 8 logical processors. That's 8 concurrent threads. The Mac Pro could have as much as 16 logical processors. I don't think the current OS really handles that many processors that well outside of specialized applications.

3. Are some of you guys insane, part 2? Apple is writing an API for developers to access the GPU for general purpose computing. Another thing to allow developers to make thing faster. And for free for those with MBP, MB and iMacs. On top this future GPUs will have even more massive computational power in the future. Intel Larrabee is coming too which is essentially a bunch of simplified x86 cores acting as a GPU.

4. The media API (Quicktime X) is being replaced with a next-gen architecture. Who in their right mind doesn't think that isn't a small undertaking. Quicktime touches virtually every app Apple produces.

5. Improving addressable memory to 16 TB.

6. They are trying to "dramatically" reduce footprint.

If they just do number 2 and 3, do it well, and make it easily accessible to applications, Snow Leopard will be worthy of an OS-X version 11, not 10.6, version number.

So this is the BIG iPhone update eh? 3G and GPS? Wow! They should be embarrassed to dedicate a whole event for this update. What happened to voice dialing, or video capturing, spoken directions from Google Maps. How about some Mac stuff, maybe something that their customers need like the forsaken mid-tower, yeah I know we'll get bug fixes for Leopard in 12 months instead.

ARRRGH! They build-up so much anticipation and deliver so little. I mean 3G and GPS should've been in the first gen iPhone.

You're unreasonable. Apple has delivered much, even if you don't care about it.

So if it is just performance and stability, what is there to preview? Come look at see this computer "not crash", see how much faster the window opens when I double click?

You're looking at it from a users viewpoint. Developers want to know about the code. This changes major portions of code, how it is used, what it is, how it interacts with the hardware, and most importantly to them, how it will affect THEIR code, and the performance of their programs.

What people seem to be missing here is that dropping PPC now would send a terrible message to the CIOs of the world. Dropping support for a 3 year old computer sets a horrible precedent that essentially tells the corporate world that unless they replace all their computers every 3 years, they risk having Apple pull the rug out from under them.

What a terrible message to send at a time when Apple has a real opportunity to get into enterprise.

Enterprise standardizes on a single OS across the organization whenever possible. For those running Windows everything from 8 year old Pentiums and Athlons to today's quad core based PCs can run the same OS. For those running MacOS there's no way to standardize on a single OS because old machines can't run Leopard and new machines can't run Tiger. Adding another set of OS requirements to the mix next year would make matters even worse.

If it comes out a year from now, it will be almost four years.

Most large corporations are on three year buying plans, so that shouldn't be a problem. Those old machines will be the ones going out anyway, if they haven't already done so.

A lot of people are discussing that recently (J.G. etc.) what with the dropping of "Mac" in the OS's name and all.

I said they should have does this a while ago, but now the timing seems pretty perfect. The ball's in their court, it's time for Steve to get off his high horse and realize this won't last forever and there'll come a time when Linux is as as to use and Google releases their own OS. The timing is right, he made this mistake in the 80's. This could be different.

Oh, come on Ireland, it's obvious. Is an iTouch a Mac? Is an iPhone a Mac? Is an ATv a Mac?

Agreed. Just because there's no eye candy or "user" features, doesn't mean an upgrade won't be beneficial. If the new OS will make your computer last for another two years, $129 (assumed price) is not a lot to spend. Apple will continue to improve Leopard (10.5), fixing bugs and patching security issues just as they always have. By the time Snow Leopard is released, Leopard will be rock solid. It's obvious to Apple where they need to focus their attention and that apparently was determined to be optimizing the OS with the hardware more.

No where is it mentioned that it will no longer support PowerPC. It does say, "reduces the footprint of Mac OS X", but that doesn't mean dropping support. More than likely it means optimizing installations, or removing redundant code and libraries. There could be a dozen different things they could do to reduce the footprint.

Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.

Scenerio 0x00...
I think they will be dropping 32-bit Intel AND PPC from Snow Leopard, but it won't be the last version of OS X to support those architectures. If we call SL 10.6, I think there will be a 10.7, say, Lion and a 10.8 Mountain LIon. Lion, like Leopard, will support PPC and 32-bit to allow for at least 4 years of support between compatible OSes. Lion will be the last OS X version to support 32-bit Intel and PPC.

Those that are still using non-64bit x86 machines will still be using Leopard just fine and still receive updates as usual, but all NEW Macs will come with the streamlines OS and those with modern Macs will be able to purchase the OS if they choose to.

Scenerio 0x01...
Apple does kill PPC and 32-bit Intel support with Snow Leopard and offer a newer version for older systems. Instead it extended the life of Leopard as a viable and modern OS by supplying point updates for longer than usual to make sure they support these aging machines. For example, Apple may take Leopard to 4 years old with 10.5.18, which would include new feature sets from Snow Leopard.

I see no reason why they would cut 32 bit support.

If fact, they CAN'T cut 32 bit support.

First of all, 32 bit costs OS X no loss in performance, so there is nothing to gain there. The code is also clean, so no problem there either.

Then there are the problems in doing it.

The first generation Intel machines would also be left out, as Yonah is 32 bit. Not good!

Secondly, and most importantly, Apple will be cutting out Office and Adobe's programs. Really not good!

How many other programs are 32 bit? I bet most of them are, and will continue to be.

These developers would be rightfully pissed if they had to redo their programs again. They also won't be happy being told that they must work with an old OS.

I'll add my voice to the list of people who is more excited about this release than any other before it. It is also funny to see some of the same people who have been whining about general stability issues of new Mac software whining, now, about the perfect solution to that problem. You know who else should do this? Adobe. Their crap, as vital as it is to the work I do, gets more bloated every time they upgrade it.

I am really looking forward to this. I'm sure Apple will deliver on the promise and if they deliver well I would be thrilled to pay $129. This is also going to be great for all of the clients I tutor and work for. I can't think of a single one of them that values new features over speed and dependability.

The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good. Samuel Johnson

I guess my Core Duo mini is fckd. Maybe I can swap out the CD for a C2D chip.

It's not like you to jump so quickly. It doesn't actually SAY that. At least, I can't find it.

What it does say is that new technologies will replace old code (it sort of says that). 64 bit isn't new technology. The only thing new there in 64 bit, from what I see, is in allowing 1,000 times as much RAM.

No where is it mentioned that it will no longer support PowerPC. It does say, "reduces the footprint of Mac OS X", but that doesn't mean dropping support. More than likely it means optimizing installations, or removing redundant code and libraries. There could be a dozen different things they could do to reduce the footprint.

Anybody but me think it's possible that when SL is released, it will reduce its footprint by offloading all the Core functions onto proprietary coprocessors designed by PA Semi, that will be built into the new Macs coming out in that time frame? And that Leopard and Snow Leopard (and maybe Lion and Mountain Lion) will run in parallel for some years, the first in each pair still supporting legacy hardware that the second doesn't have to? And that that was the significance of the bifurcating Golden Gate Bridges?

Am I really that old? Or are the kids today totally devoid of any technical understanding of operating system technology?

1. No PPC support is at best an extrapolation from conspiracy minded bloggers and their sources. The press release has no indication of dropping PPC support whatsoever. Hell, it doesn't even mention Intel other the SquirrelFish footnote. It won't be a surprise (since there could be good marketing reasons to do so), but I don't see it in this PR.

2. Are some of you guys insane, part 1? Making the operating system massively multi-core capable is a massive undertaking. Making the whole OS entirely threadsafe and re-architected for massive SMP to take advantage of all of the cores is essentially rewriting the operating system. And they better start doing it with Nehalem knocking on the door. By this time next year, Apple could be shipping a MacBook Pro (that's a laptop) consisting of 1 CPU with 4 cores and 8 logical processors. That's 8 concurrent threads. The Mac Pro could have as much as 16 logical processors. I don't think the current OS really handles that many processors that well outside of specialized applications.

3. Are some of you guys insane, part 2? Apple is writing an API for developers to access the GPU for general purpose computing. Another thing to allow developers to make thing faster. And for free for those with MBP, MB and iMacs. On top this future GPUs will have even more massive computational power in the future. Intel Larrabee is coming too which is essentially a bunch of simplified x86 cores acting as a GPU.

4. The media API (Quicktime X) is being replaced with a next-gen architecture. Who in their right mind doesn't think that isn't a small undertaking. Quicktime touches virtually every app Apple produces.

5. Improving addressable memory to 16 TB.

6. They are trying to "dramatically" reduce footprint.

If they just do number 2 and 3, do it well, and make it easily accessible to applications, Snow Leopard will be worthy of an OS-X version 11, not 10.6, version number.

That's right. I can't imaging them not stating that PPC and 32 bit support would be dropped.

They would HAVE to tell developers that. Can you imagine them still writing their 32 bit code today, only to findsurprisewhen they take their beta back with them, that it won't run their work?

Anybody but me think it's possible that when SL is released, it will reduce its footprint by offloading all the Core functions onto proprietary coprocessors designed by PA Semi, that will be built into the new Macs coming out in that time frame? And that Leopard and Snow Leopard (and maybe Lion and Mountain Lion) will run in parallel for some years, the first in each pair still supporting legacy hardware that the second doesn't have to? And that that was the significance of the bifurcating Golden Gate Bridges?

That is an interesting idea. That may be able to function as HW authentication too. (speculation) Perhaps I'm to tired because 'm sounding like it's my first day to AI.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Excellent points. But PPC is definitely out from the Snow Leopard splash page info, and ZFS will be the default filesystem for Snow Leopard Server.

So, adjusting my 2nd scenario* for allowing all Intel and no PPC, do they makes sense or do you foresee another option for Mac?

* the 2st scenario would most likely take development past the typical support cycle, making it pointless.

There's been speculation in the computer press, ok, in the rumors computer press, that dropping PPC in 10.6 (have they actually named it that yet?) is going to happen.

While I see it as possible, I can't see Apple doing it without saying so. Why would they do that? Don't you think developers writing Universal apps would like to know it as soon as possible? It would relegate their apps to a second tier OS. I would think they would want to depreciate their PPC code now.

I can't see 32 bit being dropped at all. Maybe in five years, maybe never. There's little reason for them to do so. OS X was written in clean code, where 32 bit is just a subset of 64 bit. It's not a lot of separate spaghetti code.

I assume that ZFS will be in, assuming the legal wangling about it will be over, and resolution independence as well. Possibly some multitouch, and other enhancements they've been working on. None of that would be "new" features.

Anybody but me think it's possible that when SL is released, it will reduce its footprint by offloading all the Core functions onto proprietary coprocessors designed by PA Semi, that will be built into the new Macs coming out in that time frame? And that Leopard and Snow Leopard (and maybe Lion and Mountain Lion) will run in parallel for some years, the first in each pair still supporting legacy hardware that the second doesn't have to? And that that was the significance of the bifurcating Golden Gate Bridges?

I'm not seeing why they would have to tell developers they are dropping PPC. If the SDK compiles for these apps automatically, could they not just recompile the binaries to exclude PPC?

And even if a Universal Binary app was run on an x86 only version of OS X, would it matter as it's going to ignore the PPC code anyway?

Plus, I think we'll have an event a month or two after the iPhone is released that goes over the finer points of Snow Leopard.

Except for the smallest programs, and likely even for them, optimization must be performed. Intel machines are different in a number of ways from PPC machines. Auto optimizations are not the best, even though they get better.

They could do what you're saying, but they would still have to compile for the 30+% of Macs out there that are still PPC. They would have to work on Intel code in 10.6 and 10.5, and then work the same code for PPC 10.5 only. But, perhaps they won't be happy about that.

What if Apple does give rez indep. in 10.6? Then they will be re-writing their GUI and other interface elements for that for Intel, but their PPC versions won't be able to use it.

Then if ZFS is around, they will be writing for two file systems.

If you were a developer, would you want to do all that? And how do you explain it to your customers?

I've always felt that 10.7 could be the cut-off. By then, there would likely be no more than about 10% on PPC, and developers could ignore it.

As you can see, every single executable on an Intel has both PowerPC and Intel executable code. The installer does not strip any architectures from the binary because some developers store extraneous information as extra architectures in their Mach-O binaries. You have to tell the installer, in the .plist for your installer, to strip binaries; it's not on by default. My guess is that line from the Apple Web site simply means that the installer will only install the architectures relevant for your computer (x86 and i386, or 32-bit and 64-bit), plus any developer-defined architectures.

I don't know what I was thinking or where my head is. I haven't even been drinking. Honest!

Any speculation as to how they are reducing the code significantly?

They're re-writing the code. modernizing it. Re-doing frameworks.

Quote:

a new generation of core software technologies that will streamline Mac OS X,

This says nothing other than they will be using new technologies to replace old, tired,versions. Code to offload to the GPU, etc.

Apple's been doing this for years already with Core technolgies. They are spreading it to more areas. Far better multicore and multithreaded technologies as well. While multithreading will be for Intel, multicore advances will work for any 2+ core system.

Again, I'm not saying that PPC absolutely won't be dropped, but they have to SAY something.

Maybe we'll find out one way or the other later this week. After all the con.f isn't just Jobs' speech.

As you can see, every single executable on an Intel has both PowerPC and Intel executable code. The installer does not strip any architectures from the binary because some developers store extraneous information as extra architectures in their Mach-O binaries. You have to tell the installer, in the .plist for your installer, to strip binaries; it's not on by default. My guess is that line from the Apple Web site simply means that the installer will only install the architectures relevant for your computer (x86 and i386, or 32-bit and 64-bit), plus any developer-defined architectures.

Well, some code is present because of laziness, and that would likely be cleaned up as well, but it doesn't change the argument at all.

This is good move - Leopard is a mess. I actually refused to upgrade to Leopard and I'm staying with Tiger. Now, if Leopard is fixed, I may take another look at it. So far so good. The only fly in the ointment is this: ZFS. It's ultra lame that it's just for servers. It should be the default file system for OS X across the board. Staying with HFS is seriously hobbling OS X - it's a joke to call OS X the "most advanced OS" when it has such total garbage for a file system. I'm shocked that folks here, who are supposed to be tech savvy don't recognize it. Even Linus Torvalds who is a well-known champion of OS X and the mac platform, admitted that HFS was total sh|t ("complete and utter crap," and even "scary."):

"Linus Torvalds may have dabbled in Apple territory in the past, but he's definitely not mincing any words about competing operating systems now. In a recent interview, Linus says that OS X is a "much better system" than Windows Vista overall, but that "in some ways is actually worse than Windows to program for." Apparently these problems are rooted firmly in OS X's file system (HFS and HFS+), which he describes as "complete and utter crap," and even "scary." Of course, Torvalds also took the opportunity to tout the many virtues of Linux, which he says is an "obvious choice for anything from full-blown PCs to phones or video players." Damn straight it is."

So if Apple wants to OS X to become truly a leading OS, they MUST do something about the weakest aspect: the HFS file system.

That's why I find it so disappointing that ZFS is not the default for OS X across the boards. I think I'll stick to Tiger until Apple allows enough engineers to briefly break away from the total iPhone obsession to actually give OS X a non-sh|t file system... ZFS. Until then, forget it, it's a joke.

Here is the scary part:
"To accommodate the enormous amounts of memory being added to today’s servers, Snow Leopard Server uses 64-bit kernel technology to support breakthrough amounts of RAM — up to a theoretical 16TB, or 500 times what is possible today."
64 bit Kernel is only mentioned in Snow Leopard Server page but the theorical limit of up to 16TB is the same on both Snow Leopard pages.
As far as I know the reason that makes Leopard compatible with both 64bit and 32bit processors in the same package is its 32bit kernel. When it becomes 64bit it may not be possible to make a universal release anymore, so apple may release different versions of Snow Leopard or just drop 32bit support. If they drop CoreDuo support it will be much easier for them to drop PPC G5 support too.
So, why not mention it clearly on June 2008? I think more people will accept such decisions on 2009 rather than 2008!

Quote:

Originally Posted by melgross

Well, some code is present because of laziness, and that would likely be cleaned up as well, but it doesn't change the argument at all.

It is not some code present because of laziness, the whole package is universal and you can take your Leopard installed on a PowerPC mac to any intel mac and boot just fine and start using it!(I have personally tested this with iMac G5 and iMac Core2Duo)
You cant take your intel installed Leopard to PowerPC macs because they cant boot from GPT/GUID disks.
Sorry for my bad English!

Am I really that old? Or are the kids today totally devoid of any technical understanding of operating system technology?

1. No PPC support is at best an extrapolation from conspiracy minded bloggers and their sources. The press release has no indication of dropping PPC support whatsoever. Hell, it doesn't even mention Intel other the SquirrelFish footnote. It won't be a surprise (since there could be good marketing reasons to do so), but I don't see it in this PR.

2. Are some of you guys insane, part 1? Making the operating system massively multi-core capable is a massive undertaking. Making the whole OS entirely threadsafe and re-architected for massive SMP to take advantage of all of the cores is essentially rewriting the operating system. And they better start doing it with Nehalem knocking on the door. By this time next year, Apple could be shipping a MacBook Pro (that's a laptop) consisting of 1 CPU with 4 cores and 8 logical processors. That's 8 concurrent threads. The Mac Pro could have as much as 16 logical processors. I don't think the current OS really handles that many processors that well outside of specialized applications.

3. Are some of you guys insane, part 2? Apple is writing an API for developers to access the GPU for general purpose computing. Another thing to allow developers to make thing faster. And for free for those with MBP, MB and iMacs. On top this future GPUs will have even more massive computational power in the future. Intel Larrabee is coming too which is essentially a bunch of simplified x86 cores acting as a GPU.

4. The media API (Quicktime X) is being replaced with a next-gen architecture. Who in their right mind doesn't think that isn't a small undertaking. Quicktime touches virtually every app Apple produces.

5. Improving addressable memory to 16 TB.

6. They are trying to "dramatically" reduce footprint.

If they just do number 2 and 3, do it well, and make it easily accessible to applications, Snow Leopard will be worthy of an OS-X version 11, not 10.6, version number.

It is not some code present because of laziness, the whole package is universal and you can take your Leopard installed on a PowerPC mac to any intel mac and boot just fine and start using it!(I have personally tested this with iMac G5 and iMac Core2Duo)
You cant take your intel installed Leopard to PowerPC macs because they cant boot from GPT/GUID disks.